PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XEC.TO vs. EEM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XEC.TO vs. EEM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XEC.TO (iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI Index ETF) and EEM (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XEC.TO is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the Morningstar EM GR CAD, while EEM is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Index (Net). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XEC.TO returned 10.71%/yr vs 10.72%/yr for EEM. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XEC.TO charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.72%/yr for EEM.

Performance

XEC.TO vs. EEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI Index ETF (XEC.TO) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XEC.TO is traded in CAD, while EEM is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the EEM values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XEC.TO achieves a 27.92% return, which is significantly lower than EEM's 29.43% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with XEC.TO having a 10.71% annualized return and EEM not far ahead at 10.72%.

XEC.TO

1D
-0.88%
1M
10.15%
YTD
27.92%
6M
28.48%
1Y
54.44%
3Y*
24.69%
5Y*
10.21%
10Y*
10.71%

EEM

1D
-0.84%
1M
11.26%
YTD
29.43%
6M
30.01%
1Y
57.81%
3Y*
25.39%
5Y*
10.07%
10Y*
10.72%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XEC.TO vs. EEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XEC.TO
iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI Index ETF		27.92%25.78%16.14%7.92%-14.68%-1.74%15.08%11.53%-8.26%27.93%
EEM
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF		29.43%27.83%15.64%6.55%-14.90%-4.50%15.04%12.41%-8.13%28.52%

Correlation

The correlation between XEC.TO and EEM is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.93

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.90

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.92

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.93

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2013

0.86

The correlation between XEC.TO and EEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

XEC.TO vs. EEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XEC.TO
EEM

Technology

35.0%
43.6%

Financial Services

18.4%
17.5%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
8.1%

Industrials

9.0%
6.2%

Basic Materials

6.9%
6.1%

Communication Services

6.4%
5.7%

Energy

3.9%
3.3%

Healthcare

3.7%
2.5%

Consumer Defensive

3.3%
2.7%

Utilities

2.2%
2.0%

Real Estate

1.7%
0.9%

Technology

XEC.TO
35.0%
EEM
43.6%

Financial Services

XEC.TO
18.4%
EEM
17.5%

Consumer Cyclical

XEC.TO
9.6%
EEM
8.1%

Industrials

XEC.TO
9.0%
EEM
6.2%

Basic Materials

XEC.TO
6.9%
EEM
6.1%

Communication Services

XEC.TO
6.4%
EEM
5.7%

Energy

XEC.TO
3.9%
EEM
3.3%

Healthcare

XEC.TO
3.7%
EEM
2.5%

Consumer Defensive

XEC.TO
3.3%
EEM
2.7%

Utilities

XEC.TO
2.2%
EEM
2.0%

Real Estate

XEC.TO
1.7%
EEM
0.9%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI Index ETF

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF

Often compared with XEC.TO:
XEC.TO vs. XEF.TOXEC.TO vs. VEE.TOXEC.TO vs. XEM.TOXEC.TO vs. ZEM.TOXEC.TO vs. XEQT.TOXEC.TO vs. VFV.TOXEC.TO vs. XIC.TO
Often compared with EEM:
EEM vs. VWOEEM vs. SPYEEM vs. IEMGEEM vs. IS3N.DEEEM vs. VXUSEEM vs. EEMSEEM vs. SPEM

Return for Risk

XEC.TO vs. EEM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XEC.TO
XEC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
XEC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XEC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
XEC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
XEC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
XEC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
EEM
EEM Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
EEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEM Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
EEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEM Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

XEC.TO vs. EEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI Index ETF (XEC.TO) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

XEC.TOEEMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.01
3.04

-0.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.86
3.95

-0.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.56

1.57

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.86

4.86

0.00

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.00

17.45

-0.45

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XEC.TO vs. EEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XEC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 3.01, which is comparable to the EEM Sharpe Ratio of 3.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XEC.TO and EEM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

XEC.TOEEMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.01

3.04

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.65

0.61

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

0.60

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.52

0.46

+0.05

Drawdowns

XEC.TO vs. EEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XEC.TO drawdown since its inception was -32.54%, smaller than the maximum EEM drawdown of -35.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XEC.TO and EEM.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XEC.TOEEMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.54%

-35.06%

+2.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.25%

-11.94%

+0.69%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.07%

-15.19%

+0.12%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.14%

-30.87%

+1.73%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.54%

-35.06%

+2.52%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.88%

-0.84%

-0.04%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.56%

-10.08%

+0.52%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.21%

3.32%

-0.11%

Volatility

XEC.TO vs. EEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI Index ETF (XEC.TO) is 7.80%, while iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) has a volatility of 8.38%. This indicates that XEC.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XEC.TOEEMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.80%

8.38%

-0.58%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.85%

16.71%

-0.86%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.19%

19.13%

-0.94%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.91%

16.52%

-0.61%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.60%

17.97%

-0.37%

XEC.TO vs. EEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

XEC.TO has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is lower than EEM's 0.72% expense ratio.

Dividends

XEC.TO vs. EEM - Dividend Comparison

XEC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.50%, less than EEM's 1.74% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EEM
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF		1.74%2.22%2.43%2.63%2.50%1.99%1.45%2.76%2.24%1.89%1.89%2.49%
XEC.TO
iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI Index ETF		1.50%1.92%2.03%2.16%2.28%2.78%1.64%2.87%2.66%2.13%1.80%2.19%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.93, XEC.TO and EEM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, XEC.TO is cheaper at 0.28% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XEC.TO is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for EEM.

XEC.TO is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while EEM is Emerging Markets Diversified. XEC.TO tracks Morningstar EM GR CAD, while EEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Index (Net). Their fees differ too: 0.28% for XEC.TO and 0.72% for EEM.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XEC.TO and EEM

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer